1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Anyone heard of libertydollar.org?

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by TheForce, Nov 17, 2007.

  1. TheForce

    TheForce Stop War! Lets Rave! Make Love!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    3,461
    537
    0
    Location:
    Wheelersburg, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    I was doing my normal searches and clicking on links and ran across this website libertydollar.org. The guy that runs this business is making real inflation proof currency backed by gold and silver. Apparently he has been in business since 1998 and doing pretty well up until now. On November 16 the FBI raided this place and took all the silver and gold. From what is stated on the website and other sources he has a right to make his own currency as long as he does not put “legal tender†on them or calls them coins.

    My view on things is that it’s OK to make your own gold or silver medallions for barter or anything for barter for that matter. Businesses have the right to accept or deny your form of payment.

    What I would like to know is the real story behind libertydollar.org and the FBI raid and not what the news is trying to mess up. From what I have seen in the news is that they are turning into a money laundering organization.

    If it was not for the FBI raid I most likely would have bought some liberty dollars to see how well they would be accepted around here. In fact I still would like to give it a try. They seem like a legit business just like FedEx and UPS is competing with the USPS. Why cant we have a company to compete with the federal reserve?

    Has anyone here used or have received the Liberty Dollar as a form of payment for a product or service?
     
  2. bestmapman

    bestmapman 04, 07 ,08, 09, 10, 16, 21 Prime

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    1,289
    242
    3
    Location:
    Kentucky near Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2021 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Limited
    Basically it would be worth how much gold or silver is in the coin. A one dollar coin doesn't have much gold in it. Even a one dollar silver coin won't have much silver. The question I would have is how do you determine it's value if it is not 100% solid gold or silver.
     
  3. TheForce

    TheForce Stop War! Lets Rave! Make Love!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    3,461
    537
    0
    Location:
    Wheelersburg, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Well from what I understand the Liberty $20 silver peice is one ounce of pure %99.999 silver. Yeah the $20 Liberty is worth less than $20 real dollars right now but its face value is $20. If the price of silver goes up above $20 an ounce to say $30 an ounce you would have $30 of real silver or a $20 face value medallion. I see it as a win win situation. You can’t say that with our current bank issued money. Just remember the Liberty money is backed by silver or gold and if you actually use the "coin" version of the money you will be getting %99.999 pure silver or gold. The value of the "coin" would be determined by the face value or the market value which ever is greater. With the current prices of silver and gold it would be better to use silver or gold certificates for anything less than what a one ounce gold/silver piece would be worth.
     
  4. bestmapman

    bestmapman 04, 07 ,08, 09, 10, 16, 21 Prime

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    1,289
    242
    3
    Location:
    Kentucky near Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2021 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Limited
    The face value is meaningless. If it is 1 oz. of silver, then tonight it is worth $14.58. That is the current spot price as of a few minutes ago. If you paid $20.00 for that coin it would be a poor investment. There are plenty of 1 oz. silver coins out there that you can buy for spot plus a small premium. Check this site out
    Monex
     
  5. TheForce

    TheForce Stop War! Lets Rave! Make Love!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    3,461
    537
    0
    Location:
    Wheelersburg, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Yes but its kind of hard to go into a store and plop down a one ounce silver slug and make a fair trade for 14.58. I also cant keep track of the current market value and cut off the correct weight for payment. I would not be looking for an investment but a common form of payment that is actually backed by something instead of being backed by nothing like our current money system.
     
  6. bestmapman

    bestmapman 04, 07 ,08, 09, 10, 16, 21 Prime

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    1,289
    242
    3
    Location:
    Kentucky near Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2021 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Limited
    OK, but why pay $20.00 when you could pay $14.58?
     
  7. TheForce

    TheForce Stop War! Lets Rave! Make Love!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    3,461
    537
    0
    Location:
    Wheelersburg, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Well I guess that if you can make your own "coin" that would have a standard face value and that would be accepted at businesses it would be OK plus you could make a profit. But there would have to be some standards that are followed so that you cant make a one ounce coin worth $100 face value. No one will barter with you if you did that. If there was a "Liberty bank" I could walk in with $20 federal money and come out with a $20 Liberty silver piece. I could still barter for $20 worth of goods or services. To me it would not change a thing except that if silver goes up in price I just made a profit if it goes down I still have $20 face value.

    Doesn’t anyone else want to join in? :unsure: :)
     
  8. bestmapman

    bestmapman 04, 07 ,08, 09, 10, 16, 21 Prime

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    1,289
    242
    3
    Location:
    Kentucky near Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2021 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Limited
    There is city in New England that is issuing there own currency. I can't remember where, but the businesses got together with the city to do this. As I Remember, the city issues the money and the tourists and residents buy it for $.90. Basically it is a 10% discount. The catch is that you have to spend all the money in town because the "city issued dollars" are not accepted anywhere else. It keeps the money spent in town. the business can redeem the "city dollars at the city for $.90.

    Is this similiar to what you want to do?

    Maybe someone else has heard of this.
     
  9. TheForce

    TheForce Stop War! Lets Rave! Make Love!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    3,461
    537
    0
    Location:
    Wheelersburg, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Well yeah something like that but it would have to be willingly accepted every where in the US or heck even the world not just locally and it would have to be backed by something like gold or silver. Everyone in the world would accept some form of gold or silver. You cant just make money out of thin air.
     
  10. hyo silver

    hyo silver Awaaaaay

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    15,232
    1,563
    0
    Location:
    off into the sunset
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ 2007 11 17 19:22) [snapback]541093[/snapback]</div>
    Ok. :)

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ 2007 11 17 20:56) [snapback]541116[/snapback]</div>
    Ah, but you can. Money has no value of its own, and is merely a convenient method of trade. Whether it is a chunk of metal, a piece of paper, or numbers on a screen, its only worth is what you can get for it.
     
  11. Pinto Girl

    Pinto Girl New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    3,093
    350
    0
    Location:
    California
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Nov 18 2007, 01:22 AM) [snapback]541143[/snapback]</div>
    Yeah; selling something to someone is the best way to ascertain its value at that given moment, too.

    I didn't research it yet, but the question seems to be, how the person buying these coins feels about the metals markets.

    If someone, for example, finds a sunken ship with a LOT of gold and silver on it --which would then have a tendency to flood the market-- these coins could be worth significantly less than they are now, couldn't they?
     
  12. TheForce

    TheForce Stop War! Lets Rave! Make Love!

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    3,461
    537
    0
    Location:
    Wheelersburg, Ohio
    Vehicle:
    2006 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Well I think what your forgetting is that the one ounce Liberty slug of silver has a face value. You will always be able to get that face value no matter how low the market price drops. Take the golden dollar for an example. Its only worth a few cents in actual value but you can buy a dollars worth of product with it. I have a silver dollar sitting right here beside me right now. If I were to try to spend it all I could get for it is a dollar but if I melted it down or sold it to a collector I could get $11+? for it. Same goes for the current $20 Liberty. Its only worth about $14.50 but you can buy $20 worth of product. The only difference is that with a %99.999 pure silver slug you actually have something that is valuable and that can increase in value and its inflation proof. Plus with real money you can negotiate a price for what it might be actually worth. You cant do that with a federal reserve note.

    So does anyone have an opinion about this company trying to start a money business to compete with the federal reserve? Has anyone used the Liberty dollar?
     
  13. Pinto Girl

    Pinto Girl New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    3,093
    350
    0
    Location:
    California
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Nov 18 2007, 03:37 AM) [snapback]541180[/snapback]</div>

    Currently, what it can buy is determined by the value of the metal it's based upon --in the US, in USDollars-- isn't it...? I mean, theoretically I could exchange my Liberty Dollars for metal, then sell that for Euros or something...but, really...

    It has no face value above the worth of the metal, at least currently.

    I'd definitely be interested in examining another way of determining "value" ---especially for that which we can't really put a price tag upon--- but I'm seeing this as more of a smokescreen for Paul's political ends.

    *Ron Paul really would like the US to return to the Gold Standard...wouldn't he?*

    That, from what little I know, might be problematic today. Under that idea, if I walked up to the bank and said, "I want to return all my paper certificates, and get metal in return, now" you as the bank would HAVE to always be able to fulfill that request.

    Generally, I don't think that it's necessarily a good idea, tying our currency to the metals markets and returning to the Gold Standard, which is what this is all about.

    Also, to be perfectly honest, I'm not comfortable with Paul's "if it's not, verbatum, in the Constitution, then government should have no part of it" platform. This monetary proposal we're discussing, by its very association with him, would merit more research on my part.
     
  14. Pinto Girl

    Pinto Girl New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    3,093
    350
    0
    Location:
    California
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Nov 18 2007, 03:37 AM) [snapback]541180[/snapback]</div>

    How the Gold Standard Worked


    The gold standard was a domestic standard, regulating the quantity and growth rate of a country's money supply. Because new production of gold would add only a small fraction to the accumulated stock, and because the authorities guaranteed free convertibility of gold into nongold money, the gold standard assured that the money supply and, hence, the price level would not vary much. But periodic surges in the world's gold stock, such as the gold discoveries in Australia and California around 1850, caused price levels to be very unstable in the short run.

    The gold standard was also an international standard—determining the value of a country's currency in terms of other countries' currencies. Because adherents to the standard maintained a fixed price for gold, rates of exchange between currencies tied to gold were necessarily fixed. For example, the United States fixed the price of gold at $20.67 per ounce; Britain fixed the price at £3 17s. 10.5d. per ounce. The exchange rate between dollars and pounds—the "par exchange rate"—necessarily equaled $4.867 per pound.

    Because exchange rates were fixed, the gold standard caused price levels around the world to move together. This comovement occurred mainly through an automatic balance-of-payments adjustment process called the price-specie-flow mechanism. Here is how the mechanism worked: Suppose a technological innovation brought about faster real economic growth in the United States. With the supply of money (gold) essentially fixed in the short run, this caused U.S. prices to fall. Prices of U.S. exports then fell relative to the prices of imports. This caused the British to demand more U.S. exports and Americans to demand fewer imports. A U.S. balance-of-payments surplus was created, causing gold (specie) to flow from the United Kingdom to the United States. The gold inflow increased the U.S. money supply, reversing the initial fall in prices. In the United Kingdom the gold outflow reduced the money supply and, hence, lowered the price level. The net result was balanced prices among countries.

    The fixed exchange rate also caused both monetary and nonmonetary (real) shocks to be transmitted via flows of gold and capital between countries. Therefore, a shock in one country affected the domestic money supply, expenditure, price level, and real income in another country.

    An example of a monetary shock was the California gold discovery in 1848. The newly produced gold increased the U.S. money supply, which then raised domestic expenditures, nominal income, and ultimately, the price level. The rise in the domestic price level made U.S. exports more expensive, causing a deficit in the U.S. balance of payments. For America's trading partners the same forces necessarily produced a balance of trade surplus. The U.S. trade deficit was financed by a gold (specie) outflow to its trading partners, reducing the monetary gold stock in the United States. In the trading partners the money supply increased, raising domestic expenditures, nominal incomes, and ultimately, the price level. Depending on the relative share of the U.S. monetary gold stock in the world total, world prices and income rose. Although the initial effect of the gold discovery was to increase real output (because wages and prices did not immediately increase), eventually the full effect was on the price level alone.

    For the gold standard to work fully, central banks, where they existed, were supposed to play by the "rules of the game." In other words, they were supposed to raise their discount rates—the interest rate at which the central bank lends money to member banks—to speed a gold inflow, and lower their discount rates to facilitate a gold outflow. Thus, if a country was running a balance-of-payments deficit, the rules of the game required it to allow a gold outflow until the ratio of its price level to that of its principal trading partners was restored to the par exchange rate.

    The exemplar of central bank behavior was the Bank of England, which played by the rules over much of the period between 1870 and 1914. Whenever Great Britain faced a balance-of-payments deficit and the Bank of England saw its gold reserves declining, it raised its "bank rate" (discount rate). By causing other interest rates in the United Kingdom to rise as well, the rise in the bank rate was supposed to cause holdings of inventories to decrease and other investment expenditures to decrease. These reductions would then cause a reduction in overall domestic spending and a fall in the price level. At the same time, the rise in the bank rate would stem any short-term capital outflow and attract short-term funds from abroad.

    Most other countries on the gold standard—notably France and Belgium—did not, however, follow the rules of the game. They never allowed interest rates to rise enough to decrease the domestic price level. Also, many countries frequently broke the rules by "sterilization"—shielding the domestic money supply from external disequilibrium by buying or selling domestic securities. If, for example, France's central bank wished to prevent an inflow of gold from increasing its money supply, it would sell securities for gold, thus reducing the amount of gold circulating.

    Yet the central bankers' breaches of the rules must be put in perspective. Although exchange rates in principal countries frequently deviated from par, governments rarely debased their currencies or otherwise manipulated the gold standard to support domestic economic activity. Suspension of convertibility in England (1797-1821, 1914-1925) and the United States (1862-1879) did occur in wartime emergencies. But as promised, convertibility at the original parity was resumed after the emergency passed. These resumptions fortified the credibility of the gold standard rule.

    Performance of the Gold Standard


    As mentioned, the great virtue of the gold standard was that it assured long-term price stability. Compare the aforementioned average annual inflation rate of 0.1 percent between 1880 and 1914 with the average of 4.2 percent between 1946 and 1990. (The reason for excluding the period from 1914 to 1946 is that it was neither a period of the classical gold standard nor a period during which governments understood how to manage monetary policy.)

    But because economies under the gold standard were so vulnerable to real and monetary shocks, prices were highly unstable in the short run. A measure of short-term price instability is the coefficient of variation, which is the ratio of the standard deviation of annual percentage changes in the price level to the average annual percentage change. The higher the coefficient of variation, the greater the short-term instability. For the United States between 1879 and 1913, the coefficient was 17.0, which is quite high. Between 1946 and 1990 it was only 0.8.

    Moreover, because the gold standard gives government very little discretion to use monetary policy, economies on the gold standard are less able to avoid or offset either monetary or real shocks. Real output, therefore, is more variable under the gold standard. The coefficient of variation for real output was 3.5 between 1879 and 1913, and only 1.5 between 1946 and 1990. Not coincidentally, since the government could not have discretion over monetary policy, unemployment was higher during the gold standard. It averaged 6.8 percent in the United States between 1879 and 1913 versus 5.6 percent between 1946 and 1990.

    Finally, any consideration of the pros and cons of the gold standard must include a very large negative: the resource cost of producing gold. Milton Friedman estimated the cost of maintaining a full gold coin standard for the United States in 1960 to be more than 2.5 percent of GNP. In 1990 this cost would have been $137 billion.

    About the Author
    Michael D. Bordo is a professor of economics at Rutgers University. From 1981 to 1982, he directed the research staff of the executive director of the U.S. Congressional Gold Commission.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    From Wikipedia:

    Advocates and opponents of a renewed gold standard

    The return to the gold standard is supported by Objectivists, followers of the Austrian School of Economics, and many libertarians.

    It is opposed by the vast majority of governments and economists,[citation needed] because the gold standard has frequently been shown to provide insufficient flexibility in the supply of money and in fiscal policy, because the supply of newly mined gold is finite and must be carefully husbanded and accounted for.[citation needed] [dubious – discuss] However the opposite is also believed. The paper money printed based on the finite amount of gold will go up in value as it becomes rarer.

    Few economists[attribution needed] today advocate a return to the gold standard, other than the Austrian school and some supply-siders. However, many prominent economists have expressed sympathy with a hard currency basis, and have argued against fiat money, including former US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and macro-economist Robert Barro. Greenspan famously argued the case for returning to a gold standard in his 1966 paper "Gold and Economic Freedom", in which he described supporters of fiat currencies as "welfare statists" hell-bent on using monetary printing presses to finance deficit spending. However, as Federal Reserve Chairman from 1987-2006, he presided over the most expansionary period in US monetary history, in the process creating the stock market bubble of 2000 and the housing bubble of 2005. In debates with US Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, Greenspan has argued that the fiat money system of today has retained the favorable properties of the gold standard because central bankers have pursued monetary policy as if a gold standard were still in place. History will be the judge of whether that has indeed been the case.

    The current monetary system relies on the US Dollar as an “anchor currency” which major transactions, such as the price of gold itself, are measured in. Currency instabilities, inconvertibility and credit access restriction are a few reasons why the current system has been criticized. A host of alternatives have been suggested, including energy-based currencies, market baskets of currencies or commodities; gold is merely one of these alternatives.
     
  15. bestmapman

    bestmapman 04, 07 ,08, 09, 10, 16, 21 Prime

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    1,289
    242
    3
    Location:
    Kentucky near Cincinnati, OH
    Vehicle:
    2021 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Limited
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Nov 18 2007, 03:37 AM) [snapback]541180[/snapback]</div>
    The problem I see is who is going to back the new dollar. You say that the dollar will always have a face value. Who is going to back the "face value"? The company? With US dollars the US backs the dollar. With a private company who backs the face value? If the coin has valuable "metal" in it, it will be worth what the metal is worth in US dollars. I would say that if you took a liberty dollar to a business and tried to put it off as a face value equal to dollars that would be dishonest because it is not tied to the dollar.

    The only way it could work is if the "liberty dollar" had an exchange rate similar to foreign exchange rates, then that would work, but again what is backing this new dollar? Metal? If that is the case why reinvent the wheel. There are plenty of gold, silver or other metal coins already in existence. Why do you need a private company to create it.

    The thing to remember is that all trade is basically bartering. Money is only a piece of paper and coins (gold and silver) are only pieces of metal that are used for bartering. The dollar and coins have no real value. They are only worth what someone thinks they are worth (like gold coins).

    Let me give you the following example.

    A meteor strikes the earth and the earth is in caos. People are starving. I have gold coins my friend has dollars and another person has food. Basically in this situation the gold coins and dollars are worthless. The person with food has something of real value. Now he may need to protect his food so he barters some of his food to a fourth person who has a rifle but no food. He barters some of his food for the rifle. Essentially the food has become the new currency in this situation. Even today all trade is basically bartering we just use money to facilitate the barter. The medium or currency has no real value unless someone is willing to barter for it.

    To sum up

    "Face value" is only worth what we all agree it is worth. Now in our society we have a government that has a currency and it is readily accepted and we have confidence in it. We as a society must guard this because it is tempting (as Germany did in the 30's and more recently Argentina in the 90's) to increase the money supply (printed more money) for government spending. This caused inflation. Unfortunatly I feel this is about to happen in the US to pay for the Iraq war. Others must see this also, hence the decline in the dollar.

    Now that is another subject.
     
  16. wbuttler

    wbuttler New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    85
    0
    0
    I read something about this quite awhile ago
    and as i remember this "dollar" was only in circulation in
    the town where the dude who was minting (?) them.....
    somewhere in Arkansas if i remember correctly??
    In a society where cashiers cannot make change without the
    cash register advising them of what to do--i would hate to walk in
    somewhere with one of these and try to actually buy something i needed??

    A friend and I have an ongoing discussion as to whether money
    actually means anything--anylonger--what with digital money--atm cards
    and credit cards---he's a gold guy and me i believe money is now 1's and 0's
    since most companies refuse to even pay in cash----

    Froley
     
  17. IsrAmeriPrius

    IsrAmeriPrius Progressive Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2004
    4,333
    7
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Whether the Liberty Dollar folks like it or not, they have created a form of money intended to be used as an alternative for legal tender. Article I, section 8, clause 5 of the United States Constitution gives Congress the exclusive power to issue money in the United States and regulate its value. It is illegal for any entity other than the United States Mint to issue legal tender. 18 U.S.C. § 486, makes it a Federal crime to use any gold or silver coins as money except that which is authorized by federal law.

    Here is what the United States Mint has to say about the subject matter.
     
  18. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheForce @ Nov 18 2007, 12:37 AM) [snapback]541180[/snapback]</div>
    Who is going to give you that face value? You may be gullible enough to give this guy US$20 for his "Liberty" one-oz silver slug with $14 worth of silver in it, but no store is going to accept it in payment for $20 worth of groceries.

    It basically sounds like a scam to me: This guy is trying to sell $14 worth of silver for $20. And you can bet your pants that if silver goes over $20 per ounce he's going to stop selling one-oz silver slugs for $20.

    As several posters have pointed out, you can buy one-oz silver coins, and you can buy gold coins in various weights (typically one oz, 1/2 oz, 1/4 oz, and 1/8 oz.). I knew a guy (they called him Looney Bird for obvious reasons) who refused to deal in anything but metal as his "money." It limited where he could work or purchase anything. Apparently he had convinced his employer and one small grocery store to pay him in silver and accept silver for purchases. They bought one-ounce silver ingots or slugs from the local coin shop, and sold them back to the same shop. Of course, the shop takes a cut on every sale and every purchase.

    If you think gold is a good investment you can buy Maple Leaf coins (one ounce, minted and certified by the government of Canada) or South African Krugerrands, or any of several other minted gold coins.

    The U.S. government used to fix the price of gold (under the gold standard) at $32 per ounce. But as the world market value of gold rose, the U.S. had to buy back its own dollars for gold, and this would have depleted our reserve of gold. And that's one of the problems of the gold standard.

    The nut jobs complain that paper money has no "real" value. Well, neither does gold, as Bestmapman pointed out above. And as IsrAmeriPrius points out, minting money is against the law. You can argue that point, but the courts are going to agree with the government.

    Finally, a small, controlled amount of inflation is necessary in a capitalist economy, because without a slight loss of value over time people would not invest. A money standard that fluctuated in value with the metals market would wreak havoc with the market for investment capital, which is critical to a capitalist economy.

    P.S. I see that he has paper money ("backed by gold and silver") as well as coins. What happens to the value of these when the guy takes the gold and silver, bought with the money you gave him for his paper) and absconds with it??? Or, what's to keep him from selling more paper than he has metal???

    I don't much trust the government, but I don't trust this kind of nut job at all. You're better off buying the Brooklyn bridge, 'because in the end you're more likely to find a buyer for that than for this stuff.
     
  19. n8kwx

    n8kwx Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    236
    1
    0
    Location:
    Arlington Heights, IL - NW Chicago Suburb
    Vehicle:
    Other Hybrid
    From AP (Nov 16, 2007)

    Paul's campaign said it had not authorized production of the Ron Paul dollars.

    "We have no connection with that," said Jesse Benton, a campaign spokesman for Paul. "He was using Ron as a marketing technique. We didn't have anything to do with that or sanction it or give permission in any way."



    Ron Paul intends on returning to the Gold standard legally. As reminded above, currency is one of the few powers expressly granted to the Congress under the Constitution.

    These people remind me of those who don't "volunteer" to pay their federal income taxes. Some then involuntarily serve jail time.

    Does make you wonder though why the IRS does call income taxes "voluntary".
     
  20. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(n8kwx @ Nov 18 2007, 06:20 PM) [snapback]541380[/snapback]</div>
    Does the IRS call income taxes voluntary? I was not aware of that. I know some folks on the fringe claim that income taxes are voluntary, and claim that they have the right to decline to pay them. But the courts have ruled that you are required to pay income tax, and the Constitution gives the courts the right to interpret the meaning of that same Constitution.

    Many of the same folks who claim they don't have to pay income taxes also claim that paper money is worthless. This leads to a clear solution that should make everybody happy: Pay the taxes you think you should not have to pay with that same worthless paper money. You'll be giving the government something you feel has no value, and the government will be satisfied and leave you alone. :)

    (There is actually a legal way to avoid paying income tax: Live below the taxable limit. I know some folks who do that. And the advantage is that they earn their year's income in 2 or 3 months and have the rest of the year off, which in their case they use to organize peace protests and to educate people against the lunacy of a military economy.)